Tommy Said "Intelligent Design" In School Today!
President Bush unwittingly stepped into a controversy about the
study of "Intelligent Design" in schools. This enraged many
scientists, who viewed all of life as a random outcome. These
were terrains, which even the great scientist, Albert Einstein,
feared to tread. Yet, these scientists rushed in with their
tenets about the randomness of the cosmos. Had they considered
the true consequences of an utterly random universe?
TOMMY SAID "INTELLIGENT DESIGN" IN SCHOOL TODAY!
When President Bush was asked if the concept of "Intelligent
Design" should be taught in schools, he remarked, "You're asking
me whether or not people ought to be exposed to different ideas,
and the answer is yes." This remark by the President sparked
wide controversy from many scientists and portions of the press.
Government schools in a secular country were not supposed to
teach religion. Many scientists held the view that life was a
mere accident and not the result of purposeful design. Any
suggestion that there was purposeful design would make it
religious instruction. Only if the children were taught that
life was an accident would it be scientific.
The Christian Church held that the scientific concept of
evolution as "an unguided, unplanned process of random variation
and natural selection" was not true. On the other side, many
scientists held that the advancement of life to modern man was
exactly such a process. Scientists considered themselves
superior, because they did not hold the "mere superstition" of a
purpose behind creation. Both groups were immersed in an utterly
unverifiable argument. The greatest scientist of all time,
Albert Einstein, had said, "In the end, we will never know."
Yet, these scientists disdained a concept, which they themselves
could not ever prove to be false.
Even if life was "an unguided, unplanned process of random
variation and natural selection," would that preclude the
existence of a God? The very words "natural selection" implied
that nature was purposeful. In life, the weak were destroyed.
What went up came down. Planets, stars and galaxies formed and
were destroyed according to immutable laws. In the end, the very
fundamental laws, which science discovered, resulted in the
creation of the incredible beauty of the life on earth. The very
principles uncovered by science were not random, but had magical
harmony and rigour.
Imagine a universe, which was random, where there was no order.
Where there were no laws. Where the weak survived and the strong
were destroyed. Where there was no time. Where light did not
follow its improbably exact path. Where two plus two often made
five. Was this not the random totality, lustily supported by
these scientists? Science had measured the uncanny method in the
systems of the cosmos. Did they rule out the possibility that
such celestial beauty and precision may be founded on an
"Intelligent Design?" Why did they consider the prospect to be
so objectionable? Did these scientists fear an intelligence
greater than their own? Or was it because those scientific minds
were closed to the prodigious possibilities of our limitless